Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Comparing the Perceived Size of 9 with 221 and with 2143: Biasing Effects of Inferred Context in a Between-Subjects Design

16 references·1 citing·45 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1975Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases22,647 cited
1983In defense of external invalidity.1,235 cited
2006The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic920 cited
2010Research Methods, Design, and Analysis897 cited
1976Within-subjects designs: To use or not to use?524 cited
1998The effects of framing price promotion messages on consumers' perceptions and purchase intentions424 cited
1999How to show that 9 > 221: Collect judgments in a between-subjects design.229 cited
1993Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory215 cited
1973Unwanted range effects from using within-subject experimental designs.196 cited
1978Graphic rating scales — How many categories?188 cited
2009Price Endings, Left-Digit Effects, and Choice119 cited
1983Contextual effects in social judgment68 cited
2010Individual differences in a within-subjects risky-choice framing study56 cited
1988On between-subjects versus within-subjects comparisons in testing utility theory42 cited
1977Comparisons of Intervals between Subjective Numbers, an Extension34 cited
2009

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

Are within-subjects designs transparent?

33 cited

Cited by

2019Illusory inconsistencies in judgment: Stimulus-evoked reference sets and between-subjects designs3 cited